[Answered] Examine the potential and constraints of China-India cooperation in leading global governance reform. Critically analyze its impact on multilateralism and the Global South.

Introduction

Together representing 36% of the world’s population and nearly 18% of global GDP (IMF, 2024), China and India hold pivotal potential to reshape global governance toward multipolarity, equity, and sustainable multilateralism.

Global Governance at a Crossroads

1. The post-1945 international order—anchored in the UN, IMF, World Bank, and WTO—is increasingly questioned for its Western dominance, inequitable representation, and policy conditionalities.
2. The Global South, often marginalized, demands a reformed, inclusive governance architecture responsive to new economic realities.
3. In this backdrop, China-India cooperation offers both opportunity and complexity.

Potential for Joint Leadership in Global Governance Reform

1. Shared Platforms and Institutions: BRICS, SCO, and the G20 enable Beijing and New Delhi to co-shape multilateral norms. Institutions like the New Development Bank (NDB) and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) reflect their joint effort to democratize financial governance, offering development finance without political strings.
2. Global Governance Initiatives (GGI) and Voice of Global South: China’s Global Governance Initiative (2025) emphasizes sovereign equality, rule of law, and people-centric multilateralism. India’s Voice of Global South Summit (2023) articulated “human-centric globalization.” Together, they provide an alternative narrative to Western-centric globalism.
3. Promoting Multipolarity: Both nations emphasize “reformed multilateralism”—India’s term at the G20 Delhi Declaration (2023)—and “a community with shared future for mankind”—China’s guiding philosophy under Xi Jinping. Their convergence can strengthen the UN Charter, climate justice mechanisms, and technology-sharing regimes.
4. Representation and Equity for the Global South: Joint advocacy for UN Security Council reform, WTO dispute settlement restoration, and climate financing reflects a push for institutional equity. In forums like COP28, coordinated stances could amplify the Global South’s collective voice on “Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR).”

Constraints and Structural Challenges

1. Strategic Mistrust: Border tensions (Galwan 2020), India’s participation in the Quad, and China’s close ties with Pakistan create enduring security suspicions. Competing Indo-Pacific visions—India’s “Free and Open Indo-Pacific” vs. China’s “Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)”—reflect divergent strategic outlooks.
2. Economic Asymmetry: China’s GDP (~$17.8 trillion) dwarfs India’s (~$3.9 trillion), leading to power asymmetry in multilateral forums. India’s trade deficit with China (>$100 billion, 2024) limits economic leverage.
3. Governance and Ideological Divergence: China’s state-capitalist authoritarianism contrasts with India’s liberal democratic pluralism—creating differing conceptions of rule-based international order. India’s emphasis on “strategic autonomy” often diverges from China’s bloc-based alignments.
4. Global Perceptions and Trust Deficit: Western powers view closer Sino-Indian cooperation as revisionist; developing nations fear potential “duopoly of influence” replacing Western hegemony.

Impact on Multilateralism and the Global South

Positive:

1. Joint development banks and vaccine diplomacy (e.g., BRICS Vaccine R&D Center, 2022) enhance South-South cooperation.
2. Promotes inclusive globalization, resilient supply chains, and equitable technology access.

Negative:

1. Lack of coherent policy coordination dilutes collective bargaining power in trade, climate, and digital governance.
2. Geopolitical competition risks fragmenting rather than strengthening the Global South’s unity.

Conclusion

As Kishore Mahbubani notes in The Great Convergence, a stable multipolar world demands Sino-Indian synergy—where cooperative leadership, not rivalry, ensures just, inclusive, and effective global governance.